Devin vs Factory Droids: Autonomous Coding Agent Head-to-Head

Devin and Factory’s Droids are pitched at the same buyer: an engineering team that wants to delegate well-scoped tickets to an autonomous agent and review pull requests rather than write the code. They now share the same $20 entry price on their paid individual tier, so the comparison reduces to which tool produces better measured results on the work a team actually hands off.

Reading the result

The overall margin is three points, and the round breakdown is what matters. Factory took four of seven rounds (benchmark score, surface coverage, model flexibility, and pricing predictability) on a multi-surface architecture where agents are accessible from Desktop, CLI, and SDK and on its top position on Terminal Bench. Devin took the long-horizon delegation round on the strength of a documented Nubank-scale outcome, and the enterprise-compliance round on the breadth of its published certifications and VPC deployment posture. Workflow integration broke for Factory on the strength of its incident-tool coverage.

How to map the rounds to a buying decision

If your work is a steady stream of well-defined bug tickets and small features, and you want to fire-and-forget them to a cloud agent while you sleep, Devin’s asynchronous delegation is the more relevant signal. Cognition reports that Devin delivered an 8–12x faster migration for Nubank, with engineers achieving a 12x efficiency improvement in engineering hours saved and over 20x cost savings on the project. That is the largest published outcome metric from either vendor and the cleanest evidence that the autonomous model works at scale on the right shape of task.

If your team works across CLI, IDE, Slack, and Linear and wants an agent that lives where the work already happens, Factory’s surface count is the deciding factor. Droids are available with any model, in any interface, including CLI, IDE, Slack, Linear, and browser, with tasks delegable from any of those surfaces, and the Desktop App launched in April 2026 as the latest product surface.

If your priority is model routing (cheap open-weight models for boilerplate, frontier models for architecture), Factory’s BYOK posture is the deciding factor. Droid is model-agnostic, with a /model slash command that lets users switch providers mid-session and a multi-provider roster with usage multipliers that scale against included plan credits. Devin runs on Cognition’s proprietary stack and does not currently expose comparable routing.

On the benchmark gap

Both vendors lean on third-party leaderboards, but the numbers measure different things and should not be summed. Factory’s entries, Droid (Claude Opus 4-1) and Droid (GPT-5), ranked #1 and #3 on Terminal-Bench at 58.8% and 52.5% task-success respectively, on a benchmark that tests end-to-end, multi-step workflows in a live shell. Devin 2.0 scores 45.8% on SWE-Bench Verified in a standard single-agent, no-human-in-the-loop, no best-of-N evaluation that Cognition runs.

The two benchmarks measure overlapping but distinct capabilities (shell-task completion versus closed-issue patch success on Python repos), so the headline numbers aren’t directly comparable. What is comparable is the leaderboard position: as of April 2026, the public SWE-Bench Verified leaderboard shows Anthropic’s Claude Opus 4.6 at 80.8% and Claude Sonnet 4.6 at 79.6%, with OpenAI’s coding models trailing at 77.2%. That puts Devin’s 45.8% below the frontier-model field while Factory holds the top Terminal-Bench position. That’s the substance behind the benchmark-round win, not a claim that Factory’s underlying model is stronger.

On price parity at $20 and the meter underneath

The $20 entry tier is genuinely the same number on both products. The cost behavior past that point isn’t. Devin starts at $20/month for the Core plan plus $2.25 per ACU, the Team plan costs $500/month with 250 ACUs included, and an ACU represents approximately 15 minutes of active Devin work. ACU billing, where every task consumes compute credits, is the number that actually runs the budget, and that meter makes costs genuinely hard to predict for teams with variable workloads.

Factory’s ladder is flat. Factory has raised $220M at a $1.5B valuation, and its self-serve tiers are Pro $20/mo, Plus $100/mo, and Max $200/mo. Extra Usage is prepaid credits that let users keep working after included usage is exhausted, pay-as-you-go with a $10 minimum, and Standard Usage is always consumed first. The practical consequence: a Factory customer on Plus or Max knows the ceiling. A Devin customer on Core does not.

On enterprise posture and trajectory

Both vendors are well-funded and have momentum. Factory is the agent-native software development platform built around Droids, founded in 2023 by Matan Grinberg and Eno Reyes, and has raised $220 million across five funding rounds, reaching a $1.5 billion valuation after a $150 million Series C led by Khosla Ventures in April 2026 with participation from Sequoia Capital, Insight Partners, Blackstone, NEA, and Mantis VC. Droids are used daily by hundreds of thousands of developers across enterprises including Nvidia, Adobe, EY, Palo Alto Networks, Adyen, Morgan Stanley, MongoDB, Bayer, and Zapier, and Factory has doubled revenue month over month for six consecutive months.

Cognition’s trajectory took a different turn in 2025. Cognition acquired Windsurf in July 2025, and the Devin self-serve lineup now reads Free, Pro $20/mo, Max $200/mo, Teams $80/mo, and Enterprise custom. That makes Devin a two-product company (the autonomous cloud agent plus the Devin Desktop IDE) sold under a single subscription, which is a different bet than Factory’s surface-agnostic, model-agnostic platform.

For most teams the decision isn’t about the company trajectory. It’s about whether the workload looks more like Nubank’s migration backlog (Devin) or like a steady stream of tickets routed from Linear, Sentry, and Slack across mixed editors (Factory). The seven rounds above are the inputs to that call.